Russia savours its chance to play superpower

Full Comment’s Araminta Wordsworth brings you a daily round-up of quality punditry from across the globe. Today: This could be Vladimir Putin’s moment — a chance to get his country to act like the superpower it is always claiming to be.

That would mean Russian support at the UN Security Council for effective action, something that has been in short supply, despite the international handwringing. Russia claims it is neutral on Syria, despite arms shipments, investments and diplomatic obfuscation.

Nonetheless, Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State, discerned signs of movement Friday when she said comments by Putin might imply Russia could be open to a “political transition” in Syria — code for negotiating an end to the blood-stained rule of Bashar al-Assad.

For Russia, one of Syria’s attractions remains the Mediterranean port of Tartus, which Damascus allows Moscow to use. This gives it a warm-water base for its navy. Moscow also enjoys the cachet of being Assad’s most powerful friend, propping up his discredited regime.

Even so, hints of strain are emerging, which suggest cash might trump sentiment. Some observers claim Syrian forces have had to abandon equipment because they lacked the parts needed to repair it — Russia decided not to supply them.
This was not because the continuing mayhem and bloodshed in Houla and elsewhere. Rather, it was the Assad regime’s inability or unwillingness to pay. As The Economistnotes,

Even Russia and China thought it wise to endorse a declaration in the UN Security Council expressing horror, though Russia still managed to pretend that no one knew who the culprits were. Cries of “Something must be done” have become louder. But what?
One option—preferred by such as Russia and China—is to leave the place to stew in its own juice. President Bashar Assad, whose soldiers and associated militias plainly perpetrated the Houla atrocity, would presumably increase the level of brutality against his disaffected compatriots. The uprising might simmer down or boil up until it ousted Mr Assad; either way, many thousands of people would probably be killed before the outcome was clear. That course of action has nothing to recommend it, except to governments which, lacking democratic legitimacy themselves, are unwilling to undermine others in the same position.

In an analysis piece filed from Moscow, Steve Gutterman of Reuters suggests Putin will move slowly to prevent any loss of face.

Vladimir Putin resumed the Russian presidency declaring a moral right to promote Kremlin power on the world stage. A massacre in Syria could now press him towards abandoning his closest Middle Eastern ally, but any backdown would have to be carefully engineered to protect Russian interests and save face …
“I think there may be changes in Russia’s position, because Russia has lost its ability to manage the situation,” said Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of the journal Russia in Global Affairs and a foreign policy expert with Kremlin connections.
With Western and Arab League pressure on both Syria and Russia after the Houla killings, he said, a Russian shift “is more likely than before.”

At U.S. News & World Report, John T. Bennett points to Putin’s big advantage.

[T]he once-and-again Russian president has something U.S. President Barack Obama, French President François Hollande, and their contemporaries lack: Leverage over Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Pressing Putin to exert his influence over Assad could be Washington’s next move, one former U.S. diplomat says, especially as the White House continues to resist calls to use military force … Moscow has for decades supported Syria’s strong-handed regimes. It has sent billions in investment funds into the Middle Eastern nation for a number of major economic programs and provided Damascus military hardware. The Russians also operate a warm-water port in Tartus, Syria.
In short, Syria is one of the last places in the Middle East where Russia exerts ample influence. And since Assad’s exit could tamp or terminate its Syrian sway, experts say Putin has more to lose—and to gain—than Obama and Hollande.

Time magazine’s Rania Abouzeid interviews one Mid East expert who sees Russia as a prima donna enjoying the spotlight.

“They hit the bonanza,” says the International Crisis Group’s Peter Harling. “Their position on Syria has provided them with important political dividends. People think it’s like the Cold War all over again — powerful Russia standing up to the U.S., projecting itself internationally, and with military assets in the Mediterranean. It’s all very superficial, it’s a big bluff, but like any bluff, they want it to last as long as possible.”
That role is sustained by the Annan mission, Harling says, and if the mission were to collapse entirely, so would Russia’s interpretation of its starring role. “I don’t think Russia would stand by this regime indefinitely and be an ally in the context of a civil war, for instance,” he says. “I think they have an interest in seeing this mission survive, although they don’t want it to be hijacked by what they would describe as a reckless Western regime-change agenda either.”